Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
largly hollow space of one set of atoms repels the other set of atoms, no actual contact is made.
Makes me wonder why thy ever thought electrons were particles.
Because, just visualizing ,the electrons would have to be bouncing back and forth from the center outward. Or bouncing so fast like gas forming pressure in the atmosphere. And the weak force was explanation of why electrons didn't collide with the nucleus. But it didn't explain the bouncing all around of electrons.. It seems as if the electrons are grooving to the weak force like listening to phish in a concert.
But the human world ( including Buddhism ) follows the principles of Newtonian mechanics, not quantum mechanics.
If you ask most physicists they will tell you that the ultimate nature of reality is quantum and that what we take to be a 'real' 'classical' world is a kind of illusion.
No, most scientists would acknowledge that they are still a long way from an "ultimate" unified theory. And our reality as humans is defined in terms of Newtonian physics.
It never fails to amaze me how people so often make what they think are authoritative statements without doing enough research to have the authority! The fact that we do not have a mathematically unified ultimate unified theory is irrelevant. I watched a programme on Black Holes last night and the consensus amongst the physicists is that 'quantum is ultimate'. As Erich Joos says the separation between the classical and quantum is a 'delusion' - the word is his. All decoerhence theorists assert the quantum realm to be 'ultimate'. In quantum field theory the quantum ground is completely insubstantial. The great mystery, attested to in many books on quantum theory, is how the hell the 'illusion' of the classical realm emerges. According to Zurek and friends it is a 'matter' of decoherence, but the decoherence builds the 'illusion' of reality from quantum 'dream stuff' - his words.
Also
Also, gratifying to know that when I read here that something "is an illusion", what is meant is that it is LIKE an illusion. I had a hard time with that, associating "illusion" with something like a fata morgana...
The difference between 'is an illusion' and 'like an illusion' is actually negligible. Some Buddhist schools tend to say 'like' others just say its an illusion - mostly they are happy to say its an illusion - look at Vasabandhu's example of a magician producing the illusion of an elephant for instance. Quantum theory indicates it is an illusion etched out of 'epiontic' 'dream stuff' by the community of sentient beings - this the view of Hawking and Mlodinow in the book The Grand Design.
As for your second post, we never "touch" ANYTHING. That is impossible, as there is a repulsion that ocurrs that makes that sort of contact impossible. What you perceive to be your "touching" of an object is actually the magnetic repulsion, which you have come to interpret as touching.
Where did you get this idea from? It's completely unscientific.
First of all, there is no such thing as "physical things." What we call "physicality" is actually energy condensed in a very slow rate of vibration.
Possibly at the quantum level if string theory is correct. But this has no relevance to our everyday experience - a brick is very physical if it falls on your foot.
Spiny
The quantum-reality is the Ultimate reality, while our "everyday experience" is a construct of our nervous system creating APPARENT order out of chaos. I'm sorry to say but you're showing yourself to have very little understanding of scientific thought, while simultaneously acting like an expert.
Is there any relation existing to the mind? Of quantum mechanics? Are there mind probability waves? Incidentally there are other models of quantum that Schroedingers, Dirac had a model. Could even these experiments and what is found be based on 'world's karma'?
Quantum mechanics holds that the very way that any given event is observed inherently creates its own inevitable results. Prior to observation, all there is is an ever-changing chaotic energy/probability-field. Upon observation, this chaos is forced to collapse into one logically and geometrically understandable "reality," BASED ON the inherent viewpoints of the consciousness which is observing. It is important to note, as well, that yes our thoughts are energy-waves as well, just like everything else. This is where the idea of "Law Of Attraction" comes from.
Comments
Because, just visualizing ,the electrons would have to be bouncing back and forth from the center outward. Or bouncing so fast like gas forming pressure in the atmosphere. And the weak force was explanation of why electrons didn't collide with the nucleus. But it didn't explain the bouncing all around of electrons.. It seems as if the electrons are grooving to the weak force like listening to phish in a concert.
But the human world ( including Buddhism ) follows the principles of Newtonian mechanics, not quantum mechanics.
If you ask most physicists they will tell you that the ultimate nature of reality is quantum and that what we take to be a 'real' 'classical' world is a kind of illusion.
No, most scientists would acknowledge that they are still a long way from an "ultimate" unified theory. And our reality as humans is defined in terms of Newtonian physics.
It never fails to amaze me how people so often make what they think are authoritative statements without doing enough research to have the authority! The fact that we do not have a mathematically unified ultimate unified theory is irrelevant. I watched a programme on Black Holes last night and the consensus amongst the physicists is that 'quantum is ultimate'. As Erich Joos says the separation between the classical and quantum is a 'delusion' - the word is his. All decoerhence theorists assert the quantum realm to be 'ultimate'. In quantum field theory the quantum ground is completely insubstantial. The great mystery, attested to in many books on quantum theory, is how the hell the 'illusion' of the classical realm emerges. According to Zurek and friends it is a 'matter' of decoherence, but the decoherence builds the 'illusion' of reality from quantum 'dream stuff' - his words.
Also
Also, gratifying to know that when I read here that something "is an illusion", what is meant is that it is LIKE an illusion. I had a hard time with that, associating "illusion" with something like a fata morgana...
The difference between 'is an illusion' and 'like an illusion' is actually negligible. Some Buddhist schools tend to say 'like' others just say its an illusion - mostly they are happy to say its an illusion - look at Vasabandhu's example of a magician producing the illusion of an elephant for instance. Quantum theory indicates it is an illusion etched out of 'epiontic' 'dream stuff' by the community of sentient beings - this the view of Hawking and Mlodinow in the book The Grand Design.
http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/touch/touch.html